We know that each country's Covid reporting is flawed - some over-report, some under-report, for whatever reason. It seems highly unlikely that similar and neighbouring countries (Austria v Switzerland; Czah Rep vs Slovakia etc) would show such large differences. Also, some countries - like NZ - have suppressed real numbers with extreme measures, but they are just delaying the problem.
But if you add up world totals, then all the under- and over-reporting should largely cancel out. Even if they don't, as long as the numbers are consistently over- or under-reported, the real trends are probably fairly reflected.
Worldometers.info prepare exactly such charts, it is pretty clear that:
1. The case numbers for the first 2020 wave were almost certainly under-reported (or were deaths over-reported? Or was the virus much more deadly at the start and then suddenly become milder?), but that's understandable
2. It has been going in four-month waves, it's not just winter peaks (although would be interesting to see Northern/Southern Hemisphere split). That's the interesting bit.
3. The number of deaths relative to cases is declining, but only slowly. That might simply be the effect of the majority of people in wealthier countries having had their jabs.
Thursday, 18 November 2021
Covid seems to go in four-month waves
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
Wow! Dodgy data. Ferguson must be proud . . .
Censored analysis is showing that:
More people are dying in hospital from covid if they've been double jabbed than if not
The double jabbed are more likely to catch and transmit covid.
Who knows what's really going in though when all data from history's biggest data set is being meddled with at a scale never before seen. There's nothing you can really say about it even after averaging it out. It's so corrupted.
"That might simply be the effect of the majority of people in wealthier countries having had their jabs."
Or it might be simply because all the most vulnerable have already died.
It is fascinating how this particular virus has been treated differently to all others. And for no good reason that's been spoken about widely so far. In fact, like private property in land, it is forbidden language. Curious.
And how the entire population has acquiesced on this point...without coercion. It's just known. No conspiracy required.
Covid seems to go in four-month waves
Yep - according to whatever the next political move is by Them.
B, yes, or that.
@ all the conspiracy people, if the whole thing is fake, and each government is using it as an excuse to adopt different strategies which all have different results, why do you think there are four month waves?
Have they collectively conspired to do produce fake stats which look different on a country-by-country level, more or less random, but magically add up to very regular four month waves on the world scale?
Wadsworth, stop playing the Gatekeeper.
The stats are what tell us there are so called waves. Just the stats. But what is the reality? Lies damn lies and stats.
Also waves of what exactly? Show me a piece of covid 19 virus.
Finally, as I keep pointing out, there is no such thing as a conspiracy theory. All of us, including you and I, are conspiring against each other in one giant conspiracy. Especially if we have children or a mortgage.
Wake up from your deep sleep.
RS, Covid-19 is an actual observable disease. I know because all my family and lots of people I know have had it.
The symptoms (changes in sense of taste or smell) are quite unusual, they weren't all making it up.
OK, that's just anecdotal, maybe every other story in the whole world was invented specially to fool me and the people I know into believing [something weird], and the disease was cooked up in a lab in China and then transferred directly to me a a few people around me, but it all seems a bit unlikely.
As per usual - you haven't addressed the point. Even if the whole thing is a hoax, why the four month waves? What conspiracy theory explains why the mysterious 'they' have gone to all this bother to fool us into thinking that a non-existent disease goes in four month waves?
MW I'm sorry your family have suffered. Billions have suffered from fear of the disease rather than the disease itself. This is a historic norm within social organisation generally. People are willing slaves on the whole.
Setting the stage: Before the plandemic, viruses were well understood to have a seasonal pattern, what I think you are calling a 'wave'. If the virus has not passed through the population yet, there will be another 'seasonal wave' next season. But scientifically the term wave has no meaning in virology, there is only a single wave spread across seasons. Capiche?
Did I really have the disease?: Give me the test that shows your family had a full piece of the virus in their system. Do not show me a government test which are well known to be flawed - unable to provide statistical significance and shockingly abused by our leaders to push the fear i suspect.
We all had the symptoms, honest!: Fear can do funny things to us, especially if we're susceptible to fear. Its a matter of mental and psychological health. The mind is a powerful thing and can create imaginary symptoms. Or even real symptoms unrelated to the disease and triggered by the fear. The science on this is manifest unless its not the answer we're looking for.
Prior immunity: It's highly unusual for all members of a close knit group to catch the same virus, thanks to prior immunity. I can see this as being possible if its a small group of say 4 people. Did your family all feel the symptoms at the same time? Its a highly contagious disease, if you did not all come down with it within a short space of time, without prior immunity, that is indeed curious and indicates you had different diseases. What I think our hopeless leaders call a 'Scariant', apologies Variant.
You really should stop the harsh gatekeeping and question begging. It makes you sound like a fanatic.
RS, as usual, you are being totally unclear:
"Show me a piece of covid 19 virus." This implies you deny the disease even exists. It's a stupid thing to say anyway. I can't show you 'gravity' or 'cancer cells' or 'nuclear fission' either but I've no reason to assume they don't exist.
"I'm sorry your family have suffered." This implies you accept the disease does exist. And why would you be sorry? It was bad, but not that bad, and it wasn't your fault.
You are 'reading my mind'. Text is a poor conveyor of meaning.
All I'm asking is that you prove it to me. Do you understand that?
You say you can't show me these things. So you put the fate of your own children in the hands of the authorities we both know are hopeless? I suppose we have no choice I assume you think.
But this really is a trick question. Look for any evidence that shows the authorities can even show you the disease you have. I only ask because I already know they cannot. The tests are not good enough to show it. We have to rely on statistical averages, which are poor at best and it's well known the conduct of the tests by unskilled staff makes matters so much worse. You just won't know. But this has all been censored to boost compliance.
Yes of course it exists. It's brought the 5 year excess death rate up to about normal. Just like the clot shot does have noticeable effects in reducing symptoms. But that is all. It has no effect on prevention, nor immunity, nor transmission. That is how it was designed. With all the nasty side effects being very heavily censored. So that is a risk analysis we must look into before giving it to the non vulnerable like our children. There's definitely a scientifically studied much bigger risk with this Vax than others which have been banned for much less.
Whenever government steps in to help, they will end up killing people. This is historically proven. Repeatedly. Soon we may see people being locked down due to carbon emissions.
Robin Smith: More people are dying in hospital from covid if they've been double jabbed than if not
Isn't that just because the overwhelming majority of unvaccinated people now are children (or at worst, young adults) who are far less vulnerable than the aggregate population due to their age?
A doubly-vaccinated 60-year-old is at about the same level of risk as an unvaccinated 35-year-old.
GC, even if the claim is true, then your explanation is of course the correct one.
Either way, it has nothing all to do with the four month waves.
George. It was a speculative comment I'd read.
My point is that the data is now so corrupt and censored, we'll never know how many of our children government have killed.
Similarly with the political consensus on climate change.
And the stealth tax from the recent global 'stiumlus'. Did you know that 4 out of 10 dollars ever created by the Federal Reserve where created in the last 18 months. If nothing is this is how corrupt the plandemic is.
RS, I don't understand why people assume that, simply because a lot of people have made a lot of money out of the pandemic, this means it was all planned/a hoax. The people who have made billions aren't stupid. If they were, they wouldn't be where they are today. They can see an opportunity to make a quick buck when it comes along and they have the resources to make out like bandits. I can see why people would want to believe in the plan/hoax theory, but that doesn't make it remotely convincing, no matter how much cherry-picking they do.
GC, there seems to be precious little evidence in the statistics that vaccination protects anyone at all. One would expect the number of deaths to decline versus the number of cases even without vaccination as each wave of infected people are less and less vulnerable, the more vulnerable having already died in the earlier waves.
Bayard, I hear you.
Who do you think is claiming this is a "hoax or planned"?
On those who've made million as you say in whatever way, what do you mean by the term "stupid"?
Which people do you think want to "believe in the plan/hoax theory"?
All we can say about any of it is that government is killing more people than if they'd made no interventions, in spite of them probably genuinely wanting to 'help'.
Thoughts?
@Bayard, a virus only has a single so called wave. Spread over multiple seasons.
We do not need evidence in the stats that the clot shot protects anyone.
We know for certain that it has little efficacy today, compared to the wild claims at the beginning (95%, which should have been seen as a red flag back then, given no vax has ever had more than 50% efficacy historically)
Certainly it reduces symptoms in the 'lucky ones' who are vulnerable and it works for. But it has no effect on immunity(some are saying now that the fully vaxed(whatever that means) are more likely to be more vulnerable), No effect on tramsmission(again some are saying they are bigger transmitters).
But wait! There's a global collective witch hunt under way to make the unvaxed the culprits. How many times across history have we seen this. While the majority looked on as cowards until the waves were lapping at their doors.
Of course, this piece is only opinion.
Judge for yourself
https://trialsitenews.com/the-original-antigenic-sin-covid-19-vaccination-and-sub-optimal-initial-immune-priming-deranges-the-antibody-cytotoxic-t-cell-immune-response/
B: " there seems to be precious little evidence in the statistics that vaccination protects anyone at all"
Here are the official stats.
Sure, you can simply dismiss official stat's, say they are biased by Big Pharma. And it is just a numbers thing; the efficacy might well be only be 50%; with mutations, efficacy wears off etc etc.
But they seem to be helping, seeing as the aim all along was to 'flatten the curve'.
LOL this is great conspiracy theory entertainment for a Monday morning... There's one in every village
I had covid last month, would not have liked to find out what it would have been like barebacked
@mombers the allegation of 'conspiracy theory' is one often used as a straw man. You should know better young man.
Why not look at the ideas being discussed rather than make out the idea is equivalent to proposing the holocaust never happened. That would be the more honourable approach and would shine a better light on your character.
@RS look at the company you keep. I'm sorry but I can't take you more seriously than other tin hat aficionados
M, I thought you had Covid a while ago - or was that another family member? A bit worrying if you had the jabs and then Covid :-(
@MW the Vax only reduces the effects of symptoms. It does not provide immunity nor reduce transmission. This was in the design and is widely accepted scientifically.
@Mombers, the plandemic has really scared you I can see. When I met you 8 years ago you came across as an intelligent and courageous man.
RS, neither of us are experts. I am quite sure that the vaccines "help" in mitigating [whatever]. A bit? A lot? No idea, don't care. So I happily had both jabs like a good citizen.
Like seatbelts in a car, they reduce the risk of death or serious injury. By how much? Not the foggiest, don't care, I always buckle up, even in the back seat.
Not getting a fucking booster jab though, I've had Covid and both jabs and that's enough for now.
@MW my kids had covid late last year and in Sept. Goodness knows why I didn't get it then. I'm pretty sure I had covid toe in April 2020 too. I got my jabs in Feb and April so likely worn off a bit. It was very mild sore eyes and elevated heart rate for a day or two. I'm glad I don't wear a tin hat and got the jabs so I didn't have to find out what unprotected covid is like. Anyone who actively chooses not to get a jab is beyond selfish. It's such a pity that the internet has resulted in so many people falling for conspiracy theories.
I note @RS that you're also in the Stop the Steal camp, we're almost at conspiracy theory bingo with you here :-)
"Who do you think is claiming this is a "hoax or planned"?"
You, you use the term "plandemic".
"On those who've made million as you say in whatever way, what do you mean by the term "stupid"?
What it normally means.
"Which people do you think want to "believe in the plan/hoax theory"?"
The people, like you, who claim to beleive in the plan/hoax theory.
"All we can say about any of it is that government is killing more people than if they'd made no interventions, in spite of them probably genuinely wanting to 'help'."
You don't know that. Nobody knows that, as there are no control groups and no-one ever knows for certain "what would have happened"
"@Bayard, a virus only has a single so called wave. Spread over multiple seasons."
That makes many waves. A wave is a form on a graph. When that graph has a form that includes multiple peaks and troughs, then it shows multiple waves, regardless of the cause of those peaks.
"Sure, you can simply dismiss official stat's, say they are biased by Big Pharma."
The stats are unreliable not because they have been biased by Big Pharma, but because of the definition of "death with COVID" instead of "death by COVID". The only reliable stats are those for "deaths from all causes". If they are much higher than the average for the time of year, it's a fairly safe bet that the excess deaths are caused by COVID, if they are not, then it's just guessing. I'm sure you could come up with some pretty alarming statistics if you started recording all the people who died "with" that well-known coronavirus, the common cold.
B, you didn't read or understand the first paragraph of my post.
Perhaps the official stats overstate covid cases or deaths by 20% or understate them by 10% or whatever. And we can argue about definitions which are probably different in each country. Don't care.
For the purposes of recognising trends, it doesn't matter if the numbers are wrong, as long as they are consistently wrong. As long as the approach to counting and reporting is consistent*, it will show the trends, up or down.
* Obvs, the stats people were finding their feet in the first wave, the case to death ratio is inconsistent with later waves, but it shows the timing, which fits in with the four month pattern.
Mark, I wasn't referring to the stats that are the subject of your post, I was referring to the stats you linked to with "here are the official stats", which was not about waves, but whether vaccination made you less likely to die and those stats will always be unreliable, given the metric of "death with", not "death from". As I pointed out, you can very easily die with a cold, but you are very unlikely to die from one.
B, the stats show the vaccines to be remarkably effective against reducing deaths, by a factor of 32. Similar exercises in the US show the same.
For sure, we can quibble over definitions, but however biased, they must have some effect. Even if they exaggerate by a factor of ten (for some ghastly conspiratorial reason), that's still a factor of 3, i.e. your chance of dying of it/with it is reduced by two-thirds, which seems good enough to me.
I am sure there are reliable stats showing the efficacy of vaccination, just not the ones you quoted, for the reasons I gave.
B, see if you can find some.
Not that I'm fussed, I had my jabs on the assumption that they give you 'some' protection, don't care how much. See also 'wearing a seatbelt'.
If it turns out they make no difference, well hey, I've made bigger mistakes.
I'm not fussed, either and got my jabs on the same basis as you. I still think that the whole inoculation programme was based on a desire by the government to be seen to be doing something and if it meant they could shovel squillions of public money at some of their sponsors whilst doing it, so much the better.
B, none of which explains the worldwide four month cycle...
Well no. Having failed to think of any reason outside an epidemiological one of which I am unaware for the four-month cycle, I was concentrating on why the deaths appear to have fallen off faster than the cases, point no. 3, rather than point no. 2. (BTW, do you think the abbreviation for "number" is "no." because it's actually abbreviating "numero"?)
B, your answer to 3 is good news, not as good as vaccine effectiveness, but hey.
Re "No." yes of course, Bingle it.
Post a Comment